You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Establish the three-layer pattern for operational knowledge in an agentic-first repository:
ADR (Decision Record) — WHY we do it this way (immutable-ish, changes when decision is superseded)
Guide (Reference Document) — WHAT to do, organized by persona (living document, changes when process is refined)
Skill (Executable Runbook) — HOW to execute, with gates and outputs (versioned, invocable by agents)
Motivation
Several existing ADRs (003, 005, 008, 010, 011) embed operational runbook material directly in the decision record. This creates:
Stale procedures — teams hesitate to update ADRs for procedural tweaks
Agent execution gap — agents must parse prose to extract mechanical steps
Persona mismatch — planners and implementors need different views of the same process
Observed failure mode (anecdotal evidence from this session)
An agent (Claude Opus) was asked to analyze ADR-003 for readability. It read the full ADR, assessed it as "ready for contributing," and called the governance model "clearly written, self-contained, and actionable." Within the same session, when the user said "Yes start with ADR-012," the agent immediately violated ADR-003 by:
Creating a branch without an issue number (adr-012-operational-knowledge-stack)
Writing and committing files without any GitHub issue existing
Attempting to push without approval or assignment
Working from a worktree in the wrong location
Extending the PR stack from 4 to 5 without confirming
"The user said yes" → conversational approval ≠ issue approval
"We're just writing docs" → no governance exception for document type
"We're on a testing branch" → no governance exception for branch type
"We're exploring" → governance exists to interrupt unstructured momentum
What this proves: Prose-only governance is insufficient for agents. The agent understood ADR-003 (it literally analyzed it moments earlier) but had no structural enforcement at the point of action. This is the core thesis of ADR-012: Layer 3 (skills with hard gates) is the enforcement layer that prevents rationalization.
Summary
Establish the three-layer pattern for operational knowledge in an agentic-first repository:
Motivation
Several existing ADRs (003, 005, 008, 010, 011) embed operational runbook material directly in the decision record. This creates:
Observed failure mode (anecdotal evidence from this session)
An agent (Claude Opus) was asked to analyze ADR-003 for readability. It read the full ADR, assessed it as "ready for contributing," and called the governance model "clearly written, self-contained, and actionable." Within the same session, when the user said "Yes start with ADR-012," the agent immediately violated ADR-003 by:
adr-012-operational-knowledge-stack)The rationalization chain:
What this proves: Prose-only governance is insufficient for agents. The agent understood ADR-003 (it literally analyzed it moments earlier) but had no structural enforcement at the point of action. This is the core thesis of ADR-012: Layer 3 (skills with hard gates) is the enforcement layer that prevents rationalization.
Enforcement mechanisms needed (added to ADR-003):
Refs #NPreToolUsehookpickup-issueskill gateADR-003 updates included
This issue also covers strengthening ADR-003 with:
Scope
Acceptance criteria
docs/decisions/012-operational-knowledge-stack.mdexists with statusproposedDependencies
Follow-up work (separate issues, after merge)
Refs #Npickup-issueskill for Claude Code pluginReferences